The disclosed computer-implemented method for detecting potentially malicious content in decentralized machine-learning model updates may include (i) receiving messages communicated within a group of client devices for performing an update of a shared machine-learning model, (ii) determining a bias of a target message in the messages communicated from a target client device in the group with respect to a remaining number of the messages in the messages communicated from the other client devices in the group, (iii) assigning a confidence score to each of the other client devices based on the bias determined for the target message, the confidence score representing a likelihood of potentially malicious content in the target message, and (iv) performing, based on the confidence score, a security action that prevents the potentially malicious content from compromising the update of the shared machine-learning model. Various other methods, systems, and computer-readable media are also disclosed.
|
20. A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising one or more computer-executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor of a computing device, cause the computing device to:
receive a plurality of messages communicated within a group of client devices for performing an update of a shared machine-learning model;
determine a bias of a target message in the plurality of messages communicated from a target client device in the group with respect to a remaining number of the messages in the plurality of messages communicated from the other client devices in the group;
assign a confidence score to each of the other client devices based on the bias determined for the target message, the confidence score representing a likelihood of potentially malicious content in the target message; and
perform, based on the confidence score, a security action that prevents the potentially malicious content from compromising the update of the shared machine-learning model.
1. A computer-implemented method for detecting potentially malicious content in decentralized machine-learning model updates, at least a portion of the method being performed by one or more computing devices comprising at least one processor, the method comprising:
receiving, by the one or more computing devices, a plurality of messages communicated within a group of client devices for performing an update of a shared machine-learning model;
determining, by the one or more computing devices, a bias of a target message in the plurality of messages communicated from a target client device in the group with respect to a remaining number of the messages in the plurality of messages communicated from the other client devices in the group;
assigning, by the one or more computing devices, a confidence score to each of the other client devices based on the bias determined for the target message, the confidence score representing a likelihood of potentially malicious content in the target message; and
performing, by the one or more computing devices and based on the confidence score, a security action that prevents the potentially malicious content from compromising the update of the shared machine-learning model.
12. A system for detecting potentially malicious content in decentralized machine-learning model updates, the system comprising:
at least one physical processor;
physical memory comprising a plurality of modules and computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the physical processor, cause the physical processor to:
receive, by a receiving module, a plurality of messages communicated within a group of client devices for performing an update of a shared machine-learning model;
determine, by a determining module, a bias of a target message in the plurality of messages communicated from a target client device in the group with respect to a remaining number of the messages in the plurality of messages communicated from the other client devices in the group;
assign, by an assignment module, a confidence score to each of the other client devices based on the bias determined for the target message, the confidence score representing a likelihood of potentially malicious content in the target message; and
perform, by a security module and based on the confidence score, a security action that prevents the potentially malicious content from compromising the update of the shared machine-learning model.
2. The computer-implemented method of
receiving a plurality of new messages for performing the update of the shared machine-learning model from additional client devices outside of the group of the client devices;
assigning a weight to the additional client devices; and
minimizing, based on the assigned weight, an influence of the new messages communicated from the additional client devices when performing the update of the shared machine-learning model.
3. The computer-implemented method of
4. The computer-implemented method of
5. The computer-implemented method of
6. The computer-implemented method of
calculating a ratio of a plurality of message variables associated with the messages communicated from the other client devices and a plurality of message variables associated with the target message communicated from the target client device; and
determining the bias of the target message based on a size of the calculated ratio.
7. The computer-implemented method of
determining, based on the bias, that the target message represents a large deviation from at least one of:
the remaining number of messages; or
the shared machine-learning model; and
assigning a value to the other client devices indicating a high likelihood of the potentially malicious content in the target message.
8. The computer-implemented method of
determining, based on the bias, that the target message represents a small deviation from at least one of:
the remaining number of messages; or
the shared-machine learning model; and
assigning a value to the other client devices indicating a low likelihood of the potentially malicious content in the target message.
9. The computer-implemented method of
10. The computer-implemented method of
11. The computer-implemented method of
13. The system of
receives a plurality of new messages for performing the update of the shared machine-learning model from additional client devices outside of the group of the client devices;
assigns a weight to the additional client devices; and
minimizes, based on the assigned weight, an influence of the new messages communicated from the additional client devices when performing the update of the shared machine-learning model.
14. The system of
15. The system of
16. The system of
17. The system of
calculating a ratio of a plurality of message variables associated with the messages communicated from the other client devices and a plurality of message variables associated with the target message communicated from the target client device; and
determining the bias of the target message based on a size of the calculated ratio.
18. The system of
determining, based on the bias, that the target message represents a large deviation from at least one of:
the remaining number of messages; or
the shared-machine learning model; and
assigning a value to the other client devices indicating a high likelihood of the potentially malicious content in the target message.
19. The system of
determining, based on the bias, that the target message represents a small deviation from at least one of:
the remaining number of messages; or
the shared machine-learning model; and
assigning a value to the other client devices indicating a low likelihood of the potentially malicious content in the target message.
|
Enterprise and consumer cloud computing networks are increasingly at risk of being victimized by decentralized or federated attacks on the training of machine-learning models including poisoned data attacks and noisy or mislabeled training data. Often, these attacks are the result of different endpoints/nodes all contributing data to train a single global machine-learning model.
Traditional security solutions for protecting against attacks on the training of machine-learning models are typically configured for centralized setting models where all of the data is directly received and validated from a single source. Thus, even if all of the data is not trusted, since all of it received, the ability to inspect the data when needed is available. However, these traditional solutions are ineffective in decentralized/federated settings due to the inability to perform data inspection on all of the data from a single source.
As will be described in greater detail below, the present disclosure describes various systems and methods for detecting potentially malicious content in decentralized machine-learning model updates.
In one example, a method for detecting potentially malicious content in decentralized machine-learning model updates may include (i) receiving, by one or more computing devices, a group of messages communicated within a group of client devices for performing an update of a shared machine-learning model, (ii) determining, by the one or more computing devices, a bias of a target message in the group of messages communicated from a target client device in the group with respect to a remaining number of the messages in the group of messages communicated from the other client devices in the group, (iii) assigning, by the one or more computing devices, a confidence score to each of the other client devices based on the bias determined for the target message, the confidence score representing a likelihood of potentially malicious content in the target message, and (iv) performing, by the one or more computing devices and based on the confidence score, a security action that prevents the potentially malicious content from compromising the update of the shared machine-learning model.
In some examples, the method may further include (i) receiving a group of new messages for performing the update of the shared machine-learning model from additional client devices outside of the group of the client devices, (ii) assigning a weight to the additional client devices, and (iii) minimizing, based on the assigned weight, an influence of the new messages communicated from the additional client devices when performing the update of the shared machine-learning model. In some examples, the group of messages communicated within the group of client devices and the new messages communicated from the additional client devices may be combined into the shared-machine learning model over several iterations.
In some embodiments, the additional client devices may have a trusted relationship level with the group of the client devices. In some examples, a pre-determined trust relationship level shared by the group of the client devices may exceed the trusted relationship level of the additional client devices. In some examples, the additional client devices may lack a trusted relationship with the group of the client devices.
In some embodiments, determining the bias of the target message may include (i) calculating a ratio of a group of message variables associated with the messages communicated from the other client devices and a group of message variables associated with the target message communicated from the target client device and (ii) determining the bias of the target message based on a size of the calculated ratio.
In some examples, assigning the confidence score may include (i) determining, based on the bias, that the target message represents a large deviation from at least one of (a) the remaining number of messages or (b) the shared machine-learning model, and (ii) assigning a value to the other client devices indicating a high likelihood of the potentially malicious content in the target message. In some embodiments, assigning the confidence score may include (i) determining, based on the bias, that the target message represents a small deviation from at least one of (a) the remaining number of messages or (b) the shared machine-learning model and (ii) assigning a value to the other client devices indicating a low likelihood of the potentially malicious content in the target message. In some examples, assigning the confidence score may include updating a previously determined confidence score for each of the other client devices based on the bias determined for the target message. In some embodiments, each of the client devices in the group may share a learned or a pre-defined trust relationship and based on these trust relationships, each of the client devices may learn a custom (e.g., different) machine-learning model. In some embodiments, the security action may include minimizing an impact of the potentially malicious content by filtering the potentially malicious content from the update of the shared machine-learning model.
In one embodiment, a system for detecting potentially malicious content in decentralized machine-learning model updates may include at least one physical processor and physical memory comprising a plurality of modules and computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the physical processor, cause the physical processor to (i) receive, by a receiving module, a group of messages communicated within a group of client devices for performing an update of a shared machine-learning model, (ii) determine, by a determining module, a bias of a target message in the group of messages communicated from a target client device in the group with respect to a remaining number of the messages in the group of messages communicated from the other client devices in the group, (iii) assign, by an assignment module, a confidence score to each of the other client devices based on the bias determined for the target message, the confidence score representing a likelihood of potentially malicious content in the target message, and (iv) perform, by a security module and based on the confidence score, a security action that prevents the potentially malicious content from compromising the update of the shared machine-learning model.
In some examples, the above-described method may be encoded as computer-readable instructions on a non-transitory computer-readable medium. For example, a computer-readable medium may include one or more computer-executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor of a computing device, may cause the computing device to (i) receive a group of messages communicated within a group of client devices for performing an update of a shared machine-learning model, (ii) determine a bias of a target message in the group of messages communicated from a target client device in the group with respect to a remaining number of the messages in the group of messages communicated from the other client devices in the group, (iii) assign a confidence score to each of the other client devices based on the bias determined for the target message, the confidence score representing a likelihood of potentially malicious content in the target message, and (iv) perform, based on the confidence score, a security action that prevents the potentially malicious content from compromising the update of the shared machine-learning model.
Features from any of the embodiments described herein may be used in combination with one another in accordance with the general principles described herein. These and other embodiments, features, and advantages will be more fully understood upon reading the following detailed description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and claims.
The accompanying drawings illustrate a number of example embodiments and are a part of the specification. Together with the following description, these drawings demonstrate and explain various principles of the present disclosure.
Throughout the drawings, identical reference characters and descriptions indicate similar, but not necessarily identical, elements. While the example embodiments described herein are susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, specific embodiments have been shown byway of example in the drawings and will be described in detail herein. However, the example embodiments described herein are not intended to be limited to the particular forms disclosed. Rather, the present disclosure covers all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives falling within the scope of the appended claims.
The present disclosure is generally directed to systems and methods for detecting potentially malicious content in decentralized machine-learning model updates.
As will be described in greater detail below, by determining a bias of messages communicated from a group of federated clients for updating a shared federated machine-learning model, the systems and methods described herein may enable the detection of messages containing potentially malicious content. By detecting the bias in this way, the systems and methods described herein may identify a federated client device in the group responsible for sending the potentially malicious content and thereby reduce the risk of poisoned data being received by the federated machine-learning model. In addition, the systems and methods described herein may improve the security of computing devices in a network by protecting against poisoned data attacks on shared machine-learning models by decentralized federated client devices in a network.
The following will provide, with reference to
In certain embodiments, one or more of modules 102 in
As illustrated in
As illustrated in
As illustrated in
Example system 100 in
For example, receiving module 104 may receive messages 122A-122C from target client device 206 and client devices 208 and 210. Each of messages 122A, 122B, and 122C may include message variables 214, 216, and 218, respectively. Next, determining module 106 may determine a target message bias 222. Then assignment module 106 may determine a confidence score 220. Finally, security module 108 may perform a security action that prevents potentially malicious content 224 from compromising updates of machine-learning model 126.
Server 202 generally represents any type or form of computing device capable of reading computer-executable instructions. For example, server 202 may be federated server for updating decentralized federated machine-learning models shared by a group of client devices. Additional examples of server 202 include, without limitation, security servers, application servers, web servers, storage servers, and/or database servers configured to run certain software applications and/or provide various security, web, storage, and/or database services. Although illustrated as a single entity in
Target client device 206 and client devices 208 and 210 generally represent any type or form of computing device that is capable of reading computer-executable instructions. For example, target client device 206 and client devices 208 and 210 may represent federated client devices that collaborate to update a shared federated machine-learning model. Additional examples of target client device 206 and client devices 208 and 210 include, without limitation, laptops, tablets, desktops, servers, cellular phones, Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs), multimedia players, embedded systems, wearable devices (e.g., smart watches, smart glasses, etc.), smart vehicles, smart packaging (e.g., active or intelligent packaging), gaming consoles, so-called Internet-of-Things devices (e.g., smart appliances, etc.), variations or combinations of one or more of the same, and/or any other suitable computing device.
Network 204 generally represents any medium or architecture capable of facilitating communication or data transfer. In one example, network 204 may facilitate communication between server 202 and target and client devices 206-210. In this example, network 204 may facilitate communication or data transfer using wireless and/or wired connections. Examples of network 204 include, without limitation, an intranet, a Wide Area Network (WAN), a Local Area Network (LAN), a Personal Area Network (PAN), the Internet, Power Line Communications (PLC), a cellular network (e.g., a Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) network), portions of one or more of the same, variations or combinations of one or more of the same, and/or any other suitable network.
As illustrated in
Receiving module 104 may receive messages 122A-122C in a variety of ways. For example, receiving module 104 may receive messages sent from client devices 208 and 210 to target client device 206 for calculating an update of target client device 206.
At step 304, one or more of the systems described herein may determine a bias of a target message in the plurality of messages communicated from a target client device in the group with respect to a remaining number of the messages in the plurality of messages communicated from the other client devices in the group. For example, determining module 106 may, as part of server 202 in
The term “message bias,” as used herein, generally refers to any message sent from a client computing device that has a disproportionate weight or influence with respect to updating a machine-learning model shared by other client computing devices in a device group or neighborhood. In some examples, the client computing devices may be federated client devices in the same group or neighborhood configured to communicate update messages for updating a shared machine-learning model. In this configuration, one or more of update messages sent from a target client may have a greater weight (e.g., “bias”) on the shared machine-learning model than other messages sent from the other clients in the neighborhood.
Determining module 106 may determine target message bias 222 in a variety of ways. In some examples, determining module 106 may calculate a ratio of message variables 216 and 218 associated with messages 122B and 122C communicated from client devices 208 and 210, and message variables 214 associated with a message 122A communicated from target client device 206. Determining module 106 may then determine target message bias 222 based on a size of the calculated ratio. For example, determining module 106 may use the ratio R{circumflex over ( )}i_{j}=|Median_i−C_{j→i}|/(|Median_i−C_{0→i}|+|Median_i−C_{1→i}|+|Median_i−C_{2→i}|+|Median_i−C_{3→i}|+ . . . +|Median_i−C_{N→i}|) to measure the bias level of each message variable C_{j→i} from the median of {C_{0→i}, C_{1→i}, . . . , C_{N→i}} (denoted as Median_i). The higher ratio R{circumflex over ( )}i_j is, the more biased the message from the corresponding M{circumflex over ( )}i_j is from the averaged agent (e.g., client device) update of M_i.
The term “message variable,” as used herein, generally refers to any gradient or differential associated with a message utilized for updating a machine-learning model shared by client computing devices in a device group or neighborhood. For example, a message variable for a target client device may be a stochastic gradient-based update of a neighboring client device or a may be a weighted combination/non-linear transformation of the gradient-based update of multiple client devices.
At step 306, one or more of the systems described herein may assign a confidence score to each of the other client devices based on the bias determined for the target message, the confidence score representing a likelihood of potentially malicious content in the target message. For example, assignment module 108 may, as part of server 202 in
Assignment module 108 may assign a confidence score 220 in a variety of ways. In some examples, assignment module 108 may determine, based on target message bias 222, that a message 122A represents a large deviation from messages 122B and 122C on client devices 208 and 210 for a current round of training. Additionally or alternatively, assignment module may determine that a message 122A represents a large deviation from shared machine-learning model 126 (e.g., a current aggregate model being trained). Then, assignment module 108 may assign a value (e.g., a confidence score 220) to client devices 208 and 210 indicating a high likelihood of potentially malicious content in a message 122A. Additionally or alternatively, assignment module may determine, based on target message bias 222, that a message 122A represents a small deviation from messages 122B and 122C for a current round of training. Additionally or alternatively, assignment module may determine that a message 122A represents a small deviation from shared machine-learning model 126 (e.g., a current aggregate model being trained). Assignment module 108 may then assign a value (e.g., a confidence score 220) to client devices 208 and 210 indicating a low likelihood of potentially malicious content in a message 122A. In some examples, a confidence score 220 may be an update of a previously determined confidence score for client devices 208 and 210. In some examples, assignment module 108 may assign a confidence score 220 by assigning a score f(R{circumflex over ( )}i_j) to represent the confidence over a message sent from a neighboring client device M{circumflex over ( )}i_j. Subsequently, a variable f may be designated as a proper function mapping which may be defined as a sigmoid function as follows: f(R{circumflex over ( )}i_j)=1/(1+exp(R{circumflex over ( )}i_j)). A finding of f(R{circumflex over ( )}i_j)=1 when R{circumflex over ( )}i_j is approaching 0, indicates that a message output from M{circumflex over ( )}i_j has a small deviance from the median and thus an output of M{circumflex over ( )}i_j output is more likely to be a benign output (e.g., free from malicious content).
At step 308, one or more of the systems described herein may perform, based on the confidence score, a security action that prevents the potentially malicious content from compromising the update of the shared machine-learning model. For example, security module 110 may, as part of server 202 in
The term “trusted network,” as used herein, generally refers to any network of computing devices having a pre-determined trust relationship by virtue of being members of a group and/or sharing common attributes. For example, a trusted network may include computing systems utilized by large banking institutions for making financial transactions and which share common internal data.
System 400 may also include additional client devices 410 located outside of trusted network 402. In some examples, additional client devices 410 may belong to a limited-trust or untrusted network relative to trusted network 402 and be configured to communicate update messages to machine-learning model 412.
As illustrated in
At step 510, one or more of the systems described herein may assign a weight to the additional client devices. For example, trusted network 402 may assign a weight to additional client devices 410 based on a level of trust (or lack thereof) determined for additional client devices 410 by trusted network 402. For example, if trusted network 402 determines that additional client devices 410 have a high level of trust with client devices 404-408, trusted network 402 may assign a high weight to update messages communicated from additional client devices 410 to machine-learning model 412. On the other hand, if trusted network 402 determines that additional client devices 410 have a low level (or lack) a level of trust with client devices 404-408 may assign a low weight to update messages communicated from additional client devices 410 to machine-learning model 412.
At step 515, one or more of the systems described herein may minimize, based on the assigned weight, an influence of the new messages communicated from the additional client devices when performing the update of the shared machine-learning model. For example, when additional client devices 112 have been assigned a low weight by trusted network 402, the influence of update messages sent from additional client devices 112 will be minimized when machine-learning model 412 is updated. For example, update messages received from additional client devices 410 may be ignored by machine-learning model 412 when a low weight has been assigned.
As explained in connection with method 300 above, the systems and methods described provide for detecting malicious content in decentralized federated machine-learning model updates. A threat detection application may be configured to determine a bias of a target message within a group of messages for updating a federated machine-learning model shared by a group or neighborhood of federated computing devices. The target message may be communicated from a target computing device in the group with respect to a remaining number of the messages in the group of messages communicated from the other computing devices in the group. The threat detection application may then be configured to assign a confidence score to each of the other computing devices in the group based on the bias determined for the target message. The confidence score may represent a likelihood of potentially malicious content in the target message. Based on the confidence score, potentially malicious content may be detected and subsequently prevented from compromising updates of the federated machine-learning model.
Computing system 610 broadly represents any single or multi-processor computing device or system capable of executing computer-readable instructions. Examples of computing system 610 include, without limitation, workstations, laptops, client-side terminals, servers, distributed computing systems, handheld devices, or any other computing system or device. In its most basic configuration, computing system 610 may include at least one processor 614 and a system memory 616.
Processor 614 generally represents any type or form of physical processing unit (e.g., a hardware-implemented central processing unit) capable of processing data or interpreting and executing instructions. In certain embodiments, processor 614 may receive instructions from a software application or module. These instructions may cause processor 614 to perform the functions of one or more of the example embodiments described and/or illustrated herein.
System memory 616 generally represents any type or form of volatile or non-volatile storage device or medium capable of storing data and/or other computer-readable instructions. Examples of system memory 616 include, without limitation, Random Access Memory (RAM), Read Only Memory (ROM), flash memory, or any other suitable memory device. Although not required, in certain embodiments computing system 610 may include both a volatile memory unit (such as, for example, system memory 616) and a non-volatile storage device (such as, for example, primary storage device 632, as described in detail below). In one example, one or more of modules 102 from
In some examples, system memory 616 may store and/or load an operating system 640 for execution by processor 614. In one example, operating system 640 may include and/or represent software that manages computer hardware and software resources and/or provides common services to computer programs and/or applications on computing system 610. Examples of operating system 640 include, without limitation, LINUX, JUNOS, MICROSOFT WINDOWS, WINDOWS MOBILE, MAC OS, APPLE'S 10S, UNIX, GOOGLE CHROME OS, GOOGLE'S ANDROID, SOLARIS, variations of one or more of the same, and/or any other suitable operating system.
In certain embodiments, example computing system 610 may also include one or more components or elements in addition to processor 614 and system memory 616. For example, as illustrated in
Memory controller 618 generally represents any type or form of device capable of handling memory or data or controlling communication between one or more components of computing system 610. For example, in certain embodiments memory controller 618 may control communication between processor 614, system memory 616, and I/O controller 620 via communication infrastructure 612.
I/O controller 620 generally represents any type or form of module capable of coordinating and/or controlling the input and output functions of a computing device. For example, in certain embodiments I/O controller 620 may control or facilitate transfer of data between one or more elements of computing system 610, such as processor 614, system memory 616, communication interface 622, display adapter 626, input interface 630, and storage interface 634.
As illustrated in
As illustrated in
Additionally or alternatively, example computing system 610 may include additional I/O devices. For example, example computing system 610 may include I/O device 636. In this example, I/O device 636 may include and/or represent a user interface that facilitates human interaction with computing system 610. Examples of I/O device 636 include, without limitation, a computer mouse, a keyboard, a monitor, a printer, a modem, a camera, a scanner, a microphone, a touchscreen device, variations or combinations of one or more of the same, and/or any other I/O device.
Communication interface 622 broadly represents any type or form of communication device or adapter capable of facilitating communication between example computing system 610 and one or more additional devices. For example, in certain embodiments communication interface 622 may facilitate communication between computing system 610 and a private or public network including additional computing systems. Examples of communication interface 622 include, without limitation, a wired network interface (such as a network interface card), a wireless network interface (such as a wireless network interface card), a modem, and any other suitable interface. In at least one embodiment, communication interface 622 may provide a direct connection to a remote server via a direct link to a network, such as the Internet. Communication interface 622 may also indirectly provide such a connection through, for example, a local area network (such as an Ethernet network), a personal area network, a telephone or cable network, a cellular telephone connection, a satellite data connection, or any other suitable connection.
In certain embodiments, communication interface 622 may also represent a host adapter configured to facilitate communication between computing system 610 and one or more additional network or storage devices via an external bus or communications channel. Examples of host adapters include, without limitation, Small Computer System Interface (SCSI) host adapters, Universal Serial Bus (USB) host adapters, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 1394 host adapters, Advanced Technology Attachment (ATA), Parallel ATA (PATA), Serial ATA (SATA), and External SATA (eSATA) host adapters, Fibre Channel interface adapters, Ethernet adapters, or the like. Communication interface 622 may also allow computing system 610 to engage in distributed or remote computing. For example, communication interface 622 may receive instructions from a remote device or send instructions to a remote device for execution.
In some examples, system memory 616 may store and/or load a network communication program 638 for execution by processor 614. In one example, network communication program 638 may include and/or represent software that enables computing system 610 to establish a network connection 642 with another computing system (not illustrated in
Although not illustrated in this way in
As illustrated in
In certain embodiments, storage devices 632 and 633 may be configured to read from and/or write to a removable storage unit configured to store computer software, data, or other computer-readable information. Examples of suitable removable storage units include, without limitation, a floppy disk, a magnetic tape, an optical disk, a flash memory device, or the like. Storage devices 632 and 633 may also include other similar structures or devices for allowing computer software, data, or other computer-readable instructions to be loaded into computing system 610. For example, storage devices 632 and 633 may be configured to read and write software, data, or other computer-readable information. Storage devices 632 and 633 may also be a part of computing system 610 or may be a separate device accessed through other interface systems.
Many other devices or subsystems may be connected to computing system 610. Conversely, all of the components and devices illustrated in
The computer-readable medium containing the computer program may be loaded into computing system 610. All or a portion of the computer program stored on the computer-readable medium may then be stored in system memory 616 and/or various portions of storage devices 632 and 633. When executed by processor 614, a computer program loaded into computing system 610 may cause processor 614 to perform and/or be a means for performing the functions of one or more of the example embodiments described and/or illustrated herein. Additionally or alternatively, one or more of the example embodiments described and/or illustrated herein may be implemented in firmware and/or hardware. For example, computing system 610 may be configured as an Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) adapted to implement one or more of the example embodiments disclosed herein.
Client systems 710, 720, and 730 generally represent any type or form of computing device or system, such as example computing system 610 in
As illustrated in
Servers 740 and 745 may also be connected to a Storage Area Network (SAN) fabric 780. SAN fabric 780 generally represents any type or form of computer network or architecture capable of facilitating communication between a plurality of storage devices. SAN fabric 780 may facilitate communication between servers 740 and 745 and a plurality of storage devices 790(1)-(N) and/or an intelligent storage array 795. SAN fabric 780 may also facilitate, via network 750 and servers 740 and 745, communication between client systems 710, 720, and 730 and storage devices 790(1)-(N) and/or intelligent storage array 795 in such a manner that devices 790(1)-(N) and array 795 appear as locally attached devices to client systems 710, 720, and 730. As with storage devices 760(1)-(N) and storage devices 770(1)-(N), storage devices 790(1)-(N) and intelligent storage array 795 generally represent any type or form of storage device or medium capable of storing data and/or other computer-readable instructions.
In certain embodiments, and with reference to example computing system 610 of
In at least one embodiment, all or a portion of one or more of the example embodiments disclosed herein may be encoded as a computer program and loaded onto and executed by server 740, server 745, storage devices 760(1)-(N), storage devices 770(1)-(N), storage devices 790(1)-(N), intelligent storage array 795, or any combination thereof. All or a portion of one or more of the example embodiments disclosed herein may also be encoded as a computer program, stored in server 740, run by server 745, and distributed to client systems 710, 720, and 730 over network 750.
As detailed above, computing system 610 and/or one or more components of network architecture 700 may perform and/or be a means for performing, either alone or in combination with other elements, one or more steps of an example method for detecting potentially malicious content in decentralized machine-learning model updates.
While the foregoing disclosure sets forth various embodiments using specific block diagrams, flowcharts, and examples, each block diagram component, flowchart step, operation, and/or component described and/or illustrated herein may be implemented, individually and/or collectively, using a wide range of hardware, software, or firmware (or any combination thereof) configurations. In addition, any disclosure of components contained within other components should be considered example in nature since many other architectures can be implemented to achieve the same functionality.
In some examples, all or a portion of example system 100 in
In various embodiments, all or a portion of example system 100 in
According to various embodiments, all or a portion of example system 100 in
In some examples, all or a portion of example system 100 in
In addition, all or a portion of example system 100 in
In some embodiments, all or a portion of example system 100 in
According to some examples, all or a portion of example system 100 in
The process parameters and sequence of steps described and/or illustrated herein are given by way of example only and can be varied as desired. For example, while the steps illustrated and/or described herein may be shown or discussed in a particular order, these steps do not necessarily need to be performed in the order illustrated or discussed. The various example methods described and/or illustrated herein may also omit one or more of the steps described or illustrated herein or include additional steps in addition to those disclosed.
While various embodiments have been described and/or illustrated herein in the context of fully functional computing systems, one or more of these example embodiments may be distributed as a program product in a variety of forms, regardless of the particular type of computer-readable media used to actually carry out the distribution. The embodiments disclosed herein may also be implemented using software modules that perform certain tasks. These software modules may include script, batch, or other executable files that may be stored on a computer-readable storage medium or in a computing system. In some embodiments, these software modules may configure a computing system to perform one or more of the example embodiments disclosed herein.
In addition, one or more of the modules described herein may transform data, physical devices, and/or representations of physical devices from one form to another. Additionally or alternatively, one or more of the modules recited herein may transform a processor, volatile memory, non-volatile memory, and/or any other portion of a physical computing device from one form to another by executing on the computing device, storing data on the computing device, and/or otherwise interacting with the computing device.
The preceding description has been provided to enable others skilled in the art to best utilize various aspects of the example embodiments disclosed herein. This example description is not intended to be exhaustive or to be limited to any precise form disclosed. Many modifications and variations are possible without departing from the spirit and scope of the present disclosure. The embodiments disclosed herein should be considered in all respects illustrative and not restrictive. Reference should be made to the appended claims and their equivalents in determining the scope of the present disclosure.
Unless otherwise noted, the terms “connected to” and “coupled to” (and their derivatives), as used in the specification and claims, are to be construed as permitting both direct and indirect (i.e., via other elements or components) connection. In addition, the terms “a” or “an,” as used in the specification and claims, are to be construed as meaning “at least one of.” Finally, for ease of use, the terms “including” and “having” (and their derivatives), as used in the specification and claims, are interchangeable with and have the same meaning as the word “comprising.”
Gates, Christopher, Han, Yufei
Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
11750650, | Jan 26 2023 | INTUIT INC. | Malicious message classificaton using machine learning models |
11797672, | Jun 01 2023 | HiddenLayer, Inc. | Machine learning-based technique for model provenance |
ER5864, |
Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
11188789, | Aug 07 2018 | International Business Machines Corporation | Detecting poisoning attacks on neural networks by activation clustering |
20200167471, |
Executed on | Assignor | Assignee | Conveyance | Frame | Reel | Doc |
Mar 28 2019 | NortonLifeLock Inc. | (assignment on the face of the patent) | / | |||
Mar 28 2019 | GATES, CHRIS | Symantec Corporation | ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 048732 | /0861 | |
Mar 28 2019 | HAN, YUFEI | Symantec Corporation | ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 048732 | /0861 | |
Nov 04 2019 | BLUE COAT LLC | JPMORGAN, N A | SECURITY AGREEMENT | 050926 | /0560 | |
Nov 04 2019 | LIFELOCK, INC, | JPMORGAN, N A | SECURITY AGREEMENT | 050926 | /0560 | |
Nov 04 2019 | Symantec Corporation | JPMORGAN, N A | SECURITY AGREEMENT | 050926 | /0560 | |
Nov 04 2019 | Symantec Corporation | NORTONLIFELOCK INC | CHANGE OF NAME SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 051935 | /0228 | |
Nov 04 2019 | Symantec Operating Corporation | JPMORGAN, N A | SECURITY AGREEMENT | 050926 | /0560 | |
Sep 12 2022 | JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N A | BANK OF AMERICA, N A , AS COLLATERAL AGENT | NOTICE OF SUCCESSION OF AGENCY REEL 050926 FRAME 0560 | 061422 | /0371 | |
Sep 12 2022 | NORTONLIFELOCK INC | BANK OF AMERICA, N A , AS COLLATERAL AGENT | SECURITY AGREEMENT | 062220 | /0001 | |
Nov 07 2022 | NORTONLIFELOCK INC | GEN DIGITAL INC | CHANGE OF NAME SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 062714 | /0605 |
Date | Maintenance Fee Events |
Mar 28 2019 | BIG: Entity status set to Undiscounted (note the period is included in the code). |
Date | Maintenance Schedule |
Jun 14 2025 | 4 years fee payment window open |
Dec 14 2025 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Jun 14 2026 | patent expiry (for year 4) |
Jun 14 2028 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 4) |
Jun 14 2029 | 8 years fee payment window open |
Dec 14 2029 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Jun 14 2030 | patent expiry (for year 8) |
Jun 14 2032 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 8) |
Jun 14 2033 | 12 years fee payment window open |
Dec 14 2033 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Jun 14 2034 | patent expiry (for year 12) |
Jun 14 2036 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 12) |